Docstoc

Argument Mapping and Teaching Critical Thinking

Document Sample
Argument Mapping and Teaching Critical Thinking Powered By Docstoc
					    Argument Mapping and
    Teaching Critical Thinking
    APA Chicago April 17/08

 Douglas Walton CRRAR
  Centre for Research in
Reasoning, Argumentation &
  Rhetoric: U. of Windsor
Wikipedia: entry on Diagramming
  Diagramming software consists of computer programs that are used to
                        produce graphical diagrams.
                  [edit] Types of diagramming software
  User-generated diagrams. As computer users seek to represent visual
information, such as a flowchart, tools such as Schematic, SmartDraw, Dia,
   OmniGraffle, Microsoft Visio, Inspiration, ConceptDraw 7, allow them to
express the information in the form of a diagram. Such programs are usually
 GUI-based and feature WYSIWYG diagram editing. There are also several
  diagramming tools available for developers, such as JGraph for the Java
    platform. Some user-generated diagram software is UML compatible,
   allowing model-driven translation between graphic representation and
                    functional programming languages.
 Automatically generated diagrams. Programs are available as debugger
front-ends, computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tools, or profilers.
        Diagrams are usually automatically generated by the program.
    The Discussion on Tipping

Bob and Helen are having a discussion on tipping.
Helen is against tipping. She says that tipping is a bad
practice because it lowers self-esteem, something she
considers very bad. She puts forward the following
argument.

Dr. Phil says that tipping lowers self-esteem, and he
is a psychologist.
                Araucaria
Araucaria is a software tool for analyzing arguments. It
aids a user in reconstructing and diagramming an
argument using a simple point-and-click interface. The
software also supports argumentation schemes, and
provides a user-customizable set of schemes with which
to analyze arguments.

Once arguments have been analyzed they can be saved in
a portable format called "AML", the Argument Markup
Language, which is based on XML.

http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/creed/araucaria/
Screen Shot of Araucaria Window
Argument from Expert Opinion
      Key List for Dr. Phil Example

(A) Dr. Phil says that tipping leads to lowered self-
esteem.

(B) Dr. Phil is an expert in psychology, a field that has
knowledge about self-esteem.

(C) Tipping leads to lowered self-esteem.

(D) Lowered self- esteem is a negative consequence.

(E) Tipping is a bad practice.
Diagram of Dr. Phil Example
Carneades: A New Argumentation System

 The Carneades system for reasoning with argumentation
  schemes is a computational model that builds on ontologies
  from the semantic web to provide a platform for employing
  argumentation schemes in legal reasoning. The model is an
  abstract functional specification of a computer program that can
  be implemented in any programming language. It defines
  structures for representing various elements of argumentation,
  and shows how they function together in arguments. Arguments
  in the Carneades system can be visualized using an argument
  diagram because the basic structure it uses, the model of the
  semantic web, is that of the directed labeled graph.
 Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken and Douglas Walton, ‘The
  Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof’, Artificial
  Intelligence, 171, 2007, 875-896.
Argument from Expert Opinion in Carneades
              Enthymemes
 Enthymemes are arguments with missing
  premises.
 These are premises that were not explicitly
  stated in the text, but are needed or used in
  the argument.
 Sometimes the missing part can be the
  conclusion.
 Sometimes an argumentation scheme can
  help to identify a missing part.
Instrumental Scheme for Practical Reasoning



 I have a goal G.
 Bringing about A is necessary (or sufficient)
  for me to bring about G.
 Therefore, I should (practically ought to) bring
  about A.
Scheme for Value-based Practical Reasoning


 I have a goal G.
 G is supported by my set of values, V.
 Bringing about A is necessary (or sufficient)
  for me to bring about G.
 Therefore, I should (practically ought to) bring
  about A.
The Scalpicin Example
 Harry has an itchy scalp. He needs Scalpicin.
    [Explicit argument in TV commercial]
   Harry needs something that would make his scalp no
    longer itchy [assumption].
   Scalpicin would make his scalp no longer itchy
    [assumption].
   An itchy scalp is a bad condition or problem (negative
    value) [assumption].
   A bad condition is something that should be removed
    if possible [assumption].
Diagram for the Scalpicin Example
Three Bases for the Enthymeme
 Argumentation Schemes
 Common Knowledge
 Commitment
 Using argument diagrams is a way to bring all
  three bases together and find the missing
  premises or conclusions in a given case.
 Douglas Walton, ‘The Three Bases for the
  Enthymeme: A Dialogical Theory’, Journal of
  AppliedLogic, www.uwinnipeg.ca/~walton
The Animal Freedom Example
 Animals in captivity are freer than in nature.
 [Claim made: conclusion of argument]
 There are no natural predators to kill animals
  that are in captivity.
 [Reason given to support claim: premise]
 What are the missing premises?
          Implicit Premises
 There are natural predators to kill animals that are in
  nature.
 [Implicit assumption based on common knowledge]
 If animals are in a place where there are no natural
  predators to kill them, they are freer than if they are in
  a place where there are natural predators to kill them.
 [Arguer’s commitment]
The Animal Freedom Diagram
                   References
 Glenn Rowe, Fabrizio Macagno, Chris Reed and Doug Walton,
    ‘Araucaria as a Tool for Diagramming Arguments in Teaching
    and Studying Philosophy’, Teaching Philosophy, 29, 2006, 111-
    124.
   Chris Reed, Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, ‘Argument
    Diagramming in Logic, Law and Artificial Intelligence’,
    Knowledge Engineering Review, 22, 2007, 87-109.
   Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken and Douglas Walton, ‘The
    Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof’, Artificial
    Intelligence, 171, 2007, 875-896.
   Douglas Walton, ‘The Three Bases for the Enthymeme: A
    Dialogical Theory’, Journal of Applied Logic, to appear. 2008.
   All these papers are available as pdf files on the website of
    Douglas Walton: www.uwinnipeg.ca/~walton

				
DOCUMENT INFO